A Developing Ideal: Higher Education ReformAuthor(s): W. Frank Hull IVSource: Improving College and University Teaching, Vol. 21, No. 4, Academia Alive (Autumn,1973), pp. 279-281Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27564589 .

Accessed: 25/06/2014 02:58

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to ImprovingCollege and University Teaching.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:58:44 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A Developing Ideal: Higher Education Reform

l^p^S^^PpiiS Higher education has been too slow

Sr '?^M^?^E to change and even now may be try

m ^Sifiif? xn9 t0 defend itself more than to

I^^^H^I improve. A notable student pro

>^^Jp^:^E? i7ram a/ 77j? Pennsylvania State

^^^^^^M^W University is described by the Di

SpHBD rarfor 0/ ?A? Center for the Study

Ifi? ^HlHH ?/ Higher Education at the Univer sity of Toledo (B.A., Westminster

College; M.Div., Union Theological Seminary; D.Ed.,

Pennsylvania State).

By W. FRANK HULL IV

Some

commentators have pointed out the common factors within institutions which lead to organized

student protest.1 Others have described the characteris tics of student activists.2 Still others have related the

historical patterns of development behind student dis content.3 Most have dealt descriptively with protests under which education in the more traditional sense is curtailed or at least held at bay. But within contempo rary times in a few rare instances the form of the pro test has been an attempt to reform higher education by offering an alternative to the present educational sys tem. Sometimes called "Free Universities," these forms have been organized by students to meet felt educa tional needs. This paper looks at the development and

practice of an extracurricular "Free University" on the

University Park campus of The Pennsylvania State

University. Professor Frederick Rudolph has reminded us that

"... the most sensitive barometer of what is going on at the colleges is the extracurriculum."4 At Penn State the extracurriculum has been significantly affected

by a group of student radicals who were frustrated with the type of instruction offered. These students are at

tempting to change the system. The first expression of discontent appeared during

the Spring of 1968 when seven courses were offered on a non-free, non-credit, evening basis

within a residential area complex. Fac

ulty were first asked to indicate any courses that they would volunteer to teach within a residential area. Popu larity of courses was ranked from data

gathered through a mail questionnaire. It therefore was not surprising that

most of the resident area courses were

filled within five minutes after registra tion opened. The venture was named

"creation: Cultural and Recreational

Education Achieved Through Investi

gations Ordinarily Neglected," a not

immodest title symbolizing the idealism and will of the students for change. There was a tremendous amount of initial enthusiasm from students desiring participation.

However, a professor who saw his function within these courses in terms of conveying a body of knowledge lost his students rapidly and without regard to the

amount of initial interest exhibited by the students in the topic. Conversely, a professor who saw his function in terms of first listening to what his students were ask

ing and then directing his course to their questions had a profitable educational venture. In the latter case, stu dents wrote papers and carried on a seminar level course at a high plane despite the fact that there were no grades to be given or credits earned.5 Over all, as one student concluded, "... much of the 'success* of

a creation course depended upon the attitude of the teacher and the method in which he presented his

course."

Assuming that if faculty were more carefully se lected the result would be a more valid educational ex

perience, the students tried again. This time another resi dential area was used and faculty were selected for their "reputation" with "innovative techniques" with

undergraduates. Called probe, again the initial student

reception was overwhelming, but professors were frus

trated in their attempts to create avid learners through bigger and bigger techniques.

At the same time that probe was operating, the stu dents were plotting strategy. It seemed that each resi dential area administrator wanted an "experimental col

lege" in his particular area. Student energies were thus diversified and fragmented through the absence of any over-all planning. Students, ultimately, were frustrated.

An attempt was made at a university wide "experimen tal college" under a "Committee for a Penn State Free

University," but the pole of student idealism and the

pragmatic task of setting up such an "experimental college" did not mix. One element among the students

strongly saw it as their purpose to initiate "over-all academic reform" at The Pennsylvania State Univer

sity. A second element was willing to settle for temporary educational expe riences to meet immediate needs among present students. The students were

asking themselves, "What should our aim be, immediate results or long-term changes?" Some argued that neither

was possible. It appeared to an outsider as if the movement had failed.

Nevertheless, the commitment of a few of the persistent leaders continued.

These students felt their frustration under the instructional system and were

going to do something about it. It was

Colloquy

"Colloquy has become a devel

oping ideal at Penn State. Its stu dent leaders continue to try to reform the instructional system. In the Fall the student leaders re evaluated their goals and methods."

"Here is where the intellectual

pulse of the student body is to be felt. Both student reformists and

faculty can join together to create the new."

279

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:58:44 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

280 IMPROVING COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY TEACHING

thus that a new educational experience appeared in the

Spring of 1969. colloquy . . . the American dream:

conflict '69 was a mass program of lectures and panels

specifically attempting to make students aware of the fact that education does not have to be dull and unin

volving. The leaders believed that academic reform re

quires student motivation which refuses to be satisfied

by an inadequate course of instruction, colloquy

sought: "(1) to provide the campus with an innovative

out-of-class learning situation, (2) to prove that stu

dents can and will run educational programs, (3) to

show responsible, constructive student action, and (4) to

facilitate community effort toward one education objec tive."6 The format varied significantly from both crea tion and probe. Three nationally known figures were in

vited to address mass gatherings. Lecturers Ralph

Nader, Muhammad Ali, and Al Capp were specifically selected to represent wide ranging opinions and did so.

Nineteen panels on far ranging topics involved some

where from a total of 47 to 50 panelists from outside the

University and 30 to 40 panelists from within the

University community. Movies, dramatic presentations,

and other media techniques were presented throughout the weekend. From 3,000 to 5,000 listeners attended the

mass meetings. The number at individual panels through out the weekend ranged from 75 to 500.

By any normal criterion, colloquy was a success.

colloquy buttons were visible on the town streets, fac

ulty expressed delight and amazement, some administra

tors were quietly surprised that "students" could ac

tually pull off such a large scale weekend, and most of all Penn State began to experience an intellectual "com

munity" in which students and faculty, guests and local

people, liberals and conservatives could talk together. A "continual interaction of minds and ideas/'7 which has always been a goal of American higher education, had occurred.

The student leaders were still unsatisfied. In the classrooms education was continuing "as usual" as if

colloquy had never existed. The venture had been fine for the moment, but the "system" was still persist ing despite the reformers.

colloquy has become a developing ideal at Penn State. Its student leaders continue to try to reform the instructional system. A second colloquy was held dur

ing the normally less active Summer Term. Small pan els of faculty and community figures discussing issues of drugs, race, and student involvement in university administration drew from 150 to 200 student listeners. These panels were characterized by discussion which added to clarifying the areas of agreement and dis

agreement among those present but did little else. With the return of the students in the Fall of 1969,

the student leaders reevaluated their goals and methods:

"It became apparent to us that we must seriously look at

Colloquy and reestablish our priorities. We soon realized that Colloquy cannot be an end in itself, but rather the means

to the end?the end being eventual academic reform.

We now view Colloquy as an ideal encompassing: (1) a

unique learning experience, (2) an awakening for the stu

dent body, (3) an avenue for commitment, (4) a channel and

vehicle for University reform in academics."8

It was clear at this point that the student leaders were

not about to give up.

Colloquy 1969 . . . the human dimensions of

education was an attempt to provide for "unstruc

tured education to happen." Forty "guests" from all over the country were present to "do their own thing."

There were spontaneous outbreakings of foot painting, balloon tunneling, and "buck-buck" for pure fun along with small group discussions on faculty-student rela

tions, the source of meaning for life, student culture,

identity within a university community, etc. Faculty were invited to live or eat in the dormitories while dis cussions continued around the clock9 in the Student

Union Building. To the uninvolved observer the whole

thing appeared to be chaos. One student reported, "We found out that faculty and administrators think only in outlines and without such a structure are immobilized." The student was right. The majority of the faculty had a difficult time at just "being" present with a group of students and "rapping." Only 20 Penn State faculty participated fully in these informal discussions, and only 10 accepted the offer to live in the dormitories. Other

faculty, hesitant to go into the dorms alone, stayed away. Nevertheless, those few faculty who were able to func

tion in a non-structured atmosphere made an impact. Some were still sitting on the floor of the Student

Union Building after midnight talking with groups of from 3 to 12 students about Vietnam, professional requirements and job opportunities, feelings of being a

teacher at Penn State, etc.

Students were frankly surprised. One exclaimed to his long-haired cohort, "See that man on the floor, that's

my Dean." As an example of what occurred, at least

one lengthy discussion went on within a dining hall be tween a white staff member and a Black youth concern

ing the psychological needs of Blacks today which seem to require confrontation and immediate action for the

Black to feel that anything has happened. A great deal did indeed occur, but the impromptu nature of the over all theme, The Human Dimensions of Education,

made any attempt to "evaluate" this Colloquy in terms of success or failure impossible.

The Colloquy has, though, pointed out what these student radicals want: they are seeking a faculty with

whom they can interact not only on the topic of political theory in 20th century America, but also as real human

beings who love, hate, cry, and feel. This is unexpected to most faculty. Most faculty are unsure how to react.

Both students and faculty are pressed into an increas

ingly impersonal environment and both seem to be try ing to find some place to identify as persons. The fac

ulty members' identification is with a discipline, yet he is under constant pressure from the increasing aca

demic demands of his profession, commitments to his

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:58:44 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

A DEVELOPING IDEAL: HIGHER EDUCATION REFORM 281

family, and his outside interests. As for the student, he comes as one of several thousand freshmen trying to find something to provide meaning and increasingly un

able to identify with rah-rah college spirit. Such a development as Colloquy is still a relatively

isolated phenomenon within American higher educa tion. But like the earlier student initiated literary soci

eties, fraternities, and athletic matches, Colloquy of fers the potential for a reform movement. Change, when

one stops to think about it, always occurs in this way. Professor Tillich points out that "it is not the old which creates the new. The new is beyond the old and beyond the new." . . . "In no way but the most passionate striv

ing for the new shall we become aware that the old is old and dying."10 To hold firmly to the educational tra ditions of the past is to deny the very creative impulses

within today's age. Students are neglected in higher ed ucation. Even the brightest are often bored and some times drop out rather than "play the game."11 Through

Colloquy, students are providing some of their own answers. Such an educational reform movement is ex

actly where an institution's best educators and adminis trators should be devoting their time. Here is where educators can influence a movement for the best over

all effects of the total student body. Here is also where the intellectual pulse of the student body is to be felt. In the past, reforms in higher education have often

caught educators unaware. There is in this case little excuse for unawareness. Both student reformists and

faculty educators can join together here to "create the new." The alternative is for higher education to find itself once again directed rather than directing. As

Harold Taylor has said, "... the mark of a true uni

versity is whether or not it takes its students seriously." Footnotes

1 cf. Masu Sasajima, Junius A. Davis, and Richard E. Peterson. "Or ganized Student Protest and Institutional Climate." American Educational Research Journal, V, 3 (May 1968), 291-304.

2 Paul Heist. "Intellect and Commitment: The Faces of Discontent." Order and Freedom on the Campus. Owen A. Knorr and W. John Minter, eds. Boulder: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 1965.

3 Frederick Rudolph. "Changing Patterns of Authority and Influence." Order and Freedom on the Campus. Owen A. Knorr and W. John Minter, eds. Boulder: Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, 1965.

Nancy Burton Bush. "The Student and His Professor: Colonial Times to Twentieth Century." The Journal of Higher Education, XL, 8 (Novem ber 1969), 593-609.

4 Frederick Rudolph, loc cit., 4. 5 cf. W. Frank Hull IV. creation: An Evaluation of an Experimental

College." The Journal of College Student Personnel X, 6 (November 1969), 414-417.

9 Personal communication from Theresa A. Jablonski, Chairman of Colloquy, Fall, 1969.

7 Letter from Larry Rubenstein, the sophomore chairman of Colloquy, to participants in Colloquy.

8 Personal communication from Theresa A. Jablonski, Chairman of Colloquy, Fall, 1969.

6 By "around the clock" is literally meant that the building was open

twenty-four hours and discussions continued throughout that time chang ing only in individuals involved.

10 Paul Tillich. "Behold I am Doing a New Thing." The Shaking of the Foundations. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1948, 182-184.

11 John W. Snyder. "A New Use for the SAT: Helping Salvage Po

tential Dropouts." College Board Review, #70 (Winter, 1968-1969), 5-9, claims that a "bright" student with a verbal SAT above 650 but with a high school rank in the 6th percentile rank or below has a 95% dropout rate during the first year.

The University Aids the Community ?Continued

up dated to incorporate the interest of a contemporary student body. The Black students recognized this

clearly and first. They brought to the surface this dis content with the operation of the high school, demanding

more flexibility in curriculum, respect from the teach ers, and a voice in the direction of the school. This un

precedented objection to authority was being misin

terpreted by school and community as racial aggres siveness against whites. As a result of the workshop the white students began to see that much about the school needed to be changed along the lines proposed by the Black students but it affected all the students. The overcontrolled administration, sometimes harsh and

degrading, complained about by the Blacks was like wise an affront to the white students. Tolerance of Blacks' nonconformity to rules was unfair to all. Blacks demonstrated that they did not like to be given unfair

exceptions to rules, simply because they were Black and teachers were afraid of them. As the sessions pro gressed, both whites and Blacks focused on the same

complaints and suggestions for improvements. This re action was attested to in the evaluation session by all the workshop directors. They agreed that the high school had only a minor racial problem but a major problem of reform and improvement of its system of administration based on paternalism and rigidity. Much of the problem was a matter of school policy which could be characterized as business as usual "like it was over the past twenty years'' with tolerance of deviant and noisy behavior of Black students. Basically what the students called for was a more flexible policy grow ing out of the needs of the students.

At the conclusion of the Workshop a report was drawn up. The reactions of the directors plus the con crete suggestions of the studentss were summarized and

presented to the Principal and the Academic Senate of the high school. By and large the report was little more than a list of points that had been suggested on other occsaions by several of the high school faculty but with

special emphasis that a new more personal interest and response be given to students' needs. The most impor tant income of the workshop was the recognition that the racial tension at the high school was the symptom of a more basic problem at the school. The unrest at the school was not the problem of racial prejudice but a call for a change toward a more meaningful and per sonal administration of the high school. With this in

sight the University of Portland made no small contri bution to the movement toward solution of a problem of the community and its schools.

This content downloaded from 188.72.96.115 on Wed, 25 Jun 2014 02:58:44 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions